According to Evgeny Baiguzin and Nadezhda Pupkova, they spent about two hours in this condition during summer heat
For the third time the Investigative Committee dismissed a claim to open a criminal case based on complaints of Nadezhda Pupkova and Evgeny Baiguzin from Krasnodar about the actions of the police officer during apprehension. According to Nadezhda, the police officer together with a Cossack, a member of voluntary citizen patrol, tied her with a rope against a post. Evgeny claims that he was handcuffed to a post and both of them were left standing in this condition for about two hours in summer heat. Lawyers with the Committee Against Torture will be appealing against the dismissal ruling of the investigator.
On 27 July 2020, Nadezhda Pupkova from Krasnodar applied to the Committee Against Torture for legal assistance. According to her, in the evening of 24 June, her neighbor Evgeny Baiguzin called her and told her that when he was walking the dog at Krasnaya street, not far from his house, he was detained by a police officer and a Cossack, a member of voluntary citizen patrol, for public drinking. Evgeny asked Nadezhda to take the dog from him, because the police officer dismissed his request to take the dog home.
Nadezhda came out in the street to Evgeny, next to him there was a police officer and a voluntary patrol Cossack. She asked them to introduce themselves and to tell the reason for her neighbor’s apprehension. The police officer did not introduce himself, and a heated argument started. As a result, the police officer handcuffed Evgeny to the metal gates and the voluntary patrol Cossack tied Nadezhda to the same gate with a rope. In several minutes’ time, a police vehicle came by, and Baiguzin and Pupkova were brought inside it.
According to Nadezhda, they were brought to a lane not far from the place of their apprehension and both of them were tied to a metal post, where they were standing in this position for about two hours in harsh heat.
After that the apprehended were taken to the first aid station, then – for medical examination, and in the end he was taken to the police department of the Central District of Krasnodar, where protocols on administrative violation with regard to Article 19.3 of the Code of Administrative Violations of the RF (“disobeyance to legal demand of a police officer”). Subsequently, the court set a penalty of 500 rubles to Baiguzin and Pupkova. Evgeny was put to the cell for administratively detained, where he was till morning, and Nadezhda was released on the same day.
On 19 July, Nadezhda submitted a complaint to the Ministry of the Interior with regard to the incident. Her application was transferred to the Investigative Committee.
On 19 August, a criminal case was initiated against Pupkova under elements of crime provided by Article 318 of the Criminal Code of the RF (“applying violence, not presenting a threat to life or health, against the state official”). According to the investigative authorities, Pupkova bite the police officer’s finger, thus “inflicting moral and physical sufferings”.
On 12 August, Evgeny Baigusin also applied to human rights defenders for legal assistance. He reported that in the evening of 24 June he drank a bottle of vodka with a friend of his, after that they went out to walk the dog hear his home. Having bought a bottle of vodka, he and a friend of his sat on a bench, where they were approached by a police officer and a voluntary patrol Cossack.
“The police officer said he would draw a protocol on us for public drinking. We asked them to introduce themselves, to which they replied: “Have you watched too many movies, or what?”, – Baiguzin recalls.
According to Baiguzin, the police officer demanded to present ID. Evgeny replied he did not take his passport with him, because he went out just to walk the dog near his house. The police officer said that with regard to this Baigusin will be taken to the police department for personality identification. To Evgeny’s request to let him go home to pick up the documents and leave the dog there, the police officer refused. After that, Evgeny called neighbor Nadezhda Pupkova and asked her to take the animal from him.
Furthermore, in his explanation Baiguzin confirmed that he and Pupkova were attached to the gate and the pole, the only difference that he was handcuffed and Nadezhda was tied with a rope.
On 18 August, lawyers with the Committee applied to the Investigative Committee with a crime report on behalf of Nadezhda Pupkova.
On 17 September 2020, Senior Investigator with the Investigative Department for the Central District of the Krasnodar of the Investigative Committee of the RF for the Krasnodar Territory Artyom Kosarenko issued a ruling to dismiss the claim to open a criminal case based on the results of the conducted check of Nadezhda Pupkova and Evgeny Baiguzin’s application.
During the check, the investigator questioned the police officer who apprehended Evgeny and Nadezhda. According to this police officer, when he was drawing up administrative materials on Pupkova and Baiguzin, they were behaving aggressively. And in order to prevent them from running away, and also to protect himself, the police officer attached them to a metal pole.
Investigator’s Kosarenko’s dismissal of the claim to open a criminal case was quashed on 14 October by the Prosecutor’s Office, however, after an additional check, on 29 October it issued another dismissal.
On 24 November this ruling was quashed by the superiors of the Investigative Department, and the material of the check was transferred to new investigator, Dmitry Kirichenko, for further proceedings.
Today, lawyers with the Committee Against Torture were notified that on 24 December investigator Kirichenko issued the third refusal to open a criminal case. At the same time, according to him, the ruling was already quashed as illegal. Additional check is arranged. “During six months we see, in essence, only imitation of effective work on complaints of our applicants, – lawyer with the Committee Against Torture Ilya Platonov comments. – At the present time the fourth check is underway, the investigator was changed but there has been no progress: new investigator Kirichenko in his dismissal actually duplicates the content of the previous ones, having arrived to a conclusion on lawfulness of the police officer’s actions. At the same time, he and the previous investigator simply omits the time period of Pupkova and Baiguzin custodial restraint. In the nearest future, during personal appointment with the superiors of the regional Investigative Committee we will demand to perform an agency check and to bring to disciplinary action the investigators who were performing these checks. We shall also insist on opening a criminal case against the police officer”.